Correctly grasp the big ideas to promote supporting revenue-
sharing - and with the "vertical separated into two parts,
lateral sub-2" proposition Discussion
With revenue-sharing-based classification of the implementation of the financial
system in China, since 1994, more than 10 years, obtained should be fully affirmed the positive results also revealed and accumulated a number of issues, triggering a number of Doubts and questions.
Financial difficulties faced by the local county and township issues, there is a view
that is only suitable for revenue-sharing between the central and provincial levels,
while below the provincial level are engaged in revenue-sharing should be encouraged
and advocated distinction between developed areas and backward areas, the latter not
to engage in tax-sharing system. This line of thinking and ideas can be referred to as "vertical separated into two parts, lateral sub-2 (class)." In fact, a similar proposition
in 1994, after the implementation of revenue-sharing reforms, particularly in the
counties and townships, after highlighting the financial difficulties, it is often reflected in the local work of some comrades have often resonate. However, this writer believes that these claims ignore the market economy required by the new system supporting
the overall idea of a departure from the reform package, "a permanent cure for the" principle, in fact belongs to a financial system so that the pattern of return to the "fragmentation", " various forms of lump sum "way of thinking, it is inappropriate.
China's gradual reform, implement a variety of transitional measures in order to "Classification guidance" means the gradual completion of the following sub-provincial
tax classification construction of the financial system is an inevitable choice. However,
the classification guidance, and never should be bound by these conditions, the transitional arrangements under the last resort, to zoom into the negative revenue-
sharing the most basic level of integration of the institutional framework.
Out of the financial look at financial: the tax sharing system based on classification of financial, market economy, the new system required by the financial system, supporting the need to build a unified market, the step by step to make it run
up and down about linking, transitional measures should not be solidified to achieve long-term goal obstacles
How to build a sound financial system (in terms of the overall package is how to construct a reasonable economic management system), for decades after the founding
of exploration. In the last century, the early 50s, they formed a financial "classification" concept and the initial level of framework; in 1958 and 1970, it had made vigorous decentralization of financial authority of the trial, due to a variety of
reasons, are trapped in a "place - chaos - income - die "can not close the loop cycle
power. The reform and opening up, change the "total amount of share, a year a
certain" system, in front of more than 10 years have tried various forms of "grade
lump sum" approach (the "kitchen food" can be considered as its general), and has played a certain positive After effects, its negative effect is quickly zoom. Until a clear goal of establishing a socialist market economy model of the early 90s of the 20th
century (Deng Xiaoping, "southern tour speech" after), decision-makers determined to
reform "administrative decentralization" to "economic decentralization," that change and go " contract system "road to take the revenue-sharing the road, and in 1994, fiscal
reform package to be implemented.
Pursue a market economy, why the financial institutions must engage in revenue-
sharing? There are many discussions on this already. In short, the fiscal system to meet the objective requirements of the market economy, "two in one" deal with the government and enterprises, central and local two basic economic relations, in addition to revenue-sharing in addition, there is no alternative.
Many people talk about the tax-sharing, they often only see it dealt with the
relationship between central and local side. In fact, from a certain sense, the precondition for the overall reform of the more significant, first of all by virtue of the tax system to correctly handle the relationship between the government and
enterprises, that is in accordance with corporate tax system to get rid of the administrative relationship of the old system of organizing financial revenues crux of the enterprise place big or small, regardless of administrative level, pay taxes according
to law, fair competition (the payment of taxes that pay tax, the payment of local taxes to pay local tax, after-tax profits by property rights norms and the rule of law, policy environment under the constraints assigned by enterprises, all enterprises in the The
Government at all levels before the non-discriminatory) status, thus the only solution in
the micro-foundation of China's market economy to build a key problem, namely, "a real fair competition among enterprises of the brush to sell a starting point."
Meanwhile, the tax sharing system out of the contract system under the central and local "bargain" ( "certain × years") and "system cycle" that can form a stable, standardized central and local governments, the Government at all levels the
relationship between the distribution of financial resources and local The Government's long-term behavior.
Tax sharing system for the handling of the relationship between central and local governments, but also closely related to the market economy and the overall situation,
namely, the institutional framework of tax-sharing system, the various levels of
government powers - financial power - the configuration of financial resources is
expected to have access to a link up with the market economy logic, logical
arrangements: the so-called powers, it is necessary and reasonable to define all levels of government to adapt to the market economy does not get "Offside" is not "absence" of the functions of the boundary; property right refers to the match at all financial levels
for all levels of government powers with the echoes of the the tax base and tax administration in a unified pattern of appropriate arrangements for taxes around the right to choose, the right to adjust rates, fees rights. For example, the central
government to carry out macro-control functions, it should be mastered is conducive to safeguarding the normal and efficient operation of a unified market, liquidity is strong, should not be divided, with counter-cyclical macro-economic "stabilizer" feature of
taxes (personal income tax), as well as conducive to implementing the Industry policy, tax (consumption tax, etc.); local authorities to provide regional public goods for the implementation and optimization of investment environment, the functions of area,
depth and liquidity should be weak, with information superiority and administration advantages, and can form a virtuous cycle of their own functions, and taxes (real estate taxes, etc.). So, by no means should be considered the reasonable allocation of property
right is not important, it seems that you can skip directly to search for property right configuration, "the same powers and financial resources," because property (broad base) configuration, is in line with all levels of government powers in the unified market
in the rational division of labor, and thus the whole system of government and the market to form rational division of labor between the enable the Government to stabilize, standardize the way "to government-controlled money and to financial
administration," an important institutional arrangements can not be avoided, and can not be ignored. Of course, even better to do with the financial authority of the powers of the echo-and-match, nor did it mean "the same powers and financial resources,"
because the same tax base, both in developed and less developed regions of the abundance level are likely to differ materially from those . At the institutional design, the rational allocation of financial authority must be followed as far as possible, adding
them with reasonable, in place of the top-down transfer payments in order to
approximate to achieve so that less-developed areas of government, its financial
resources can also be compared with the general powers consistent results. However,
we can not be used after the financial power to set the importance of transfer payments, to negate the "property right to set" the importance, as it is to make transfer payments to long-lasting, healthy functioning of the front part, which has the financial
institutional arrangements in the tax classification the important and indispensable component. In fact, the less developed regions in the certain historical period, regardless of how the tax base configuration, it is impossible to achieve their own
financial resources to fully support the final say, but that does not mean that the configuration of property right is not important, but that just is not enough property right configuration, as the importance of medication can not deny the importance of
eating, the importance of foreign aid can not deny the importance of self-reliance.
In short, the general direction of the reform of tax system in 1994 and the basic system of results, must be certain and maintenance. At that time, the central government and
the provincial representative of the "local" revenue-sharing between the first Dacheng
framework and requirements, and hopes to gradually resolve later in a dynamic below the provincial level to rationalize the system, and implement revenue-sharing issue,
which is in the right Under the general direction of the transitional arrangements in line with the actual intention of the single market, with the gradual development and improvement, so that the progressive tax system in the province the following have also
run into a more standardized and the East realm. But the reality is, 1994 years later, and below the provincial tax-sharing aspects of the system is almost not made
substantive progress, "transitional" has solidified the trend, the transition in some of
the negative factors in the accumulation and amplification, a variety of constraints, forcing central and local governments in the tax division of the overall framework, the "shared taxes" and become increasingly more; at the local level among the four, then in
fact become a way engage in a policy, different, diverse, complex variable Share and share, the more close to the grassroots level, the more inclined to adopt the "bargain" in a variety of contract system and into the system. Not only in the less developed
regions, even in developed areas, county and township levels have not been able to truly build on the revenue-sharing. Overall, up to now, it can be said of China's financial system below the provincial level, and not really into the tax system orbit.
So, if we are to "jump out of the financial look at financial" global thinking and forward-thinking look at the issue, it should be noted that following the implementation in our province, with powers to match the sub-tax classification of the general direction
of the financial system and in accordance with objective requirements of the market economy so that the determination of the progressive tax system linking unshakable. Crux of the issue and urgent efforts should be made to address how the transition to
avoid the current state of solidification of non-normative, inhibit the negative effects of
amplification. Reposted elsewhere in the paper for free download http://
Primary dilemma Anatomy: Transition to flow, and the contradictions
accumulate, causing financial difficulties highlight the counties and townships; where four fiscal framework and revenue-sharing in the province, the implementation of the
following exist between incompatible with the nature of
Supporting the 1994 fiscal reform, due to the transition system below the provincial level did not go well, the transition state of the old with the new contradictions and conflicts intertwined, cumulative, leading to the focus on the financial power shift and
powers down the center of gravity, in the overall national strength rising, the country's financial strong growth in revenues, local fiscal revenue is also rising circumstances, the central and local levels of high-end (provincial, municipal) share of the total
financial resources increased, while the financial difficulties of counties and townships are prominent in the less developed regions to reflect the most strong. Originally, so that all levels of government powers and financial authority to enhance the echo and
matching, and through top-down transfer payments to less-developed regions to
achieve roughly the same powers and available financial resources, it is tax-sharing
fiscal system of the "spiritual essence" and the advantages of where, why in real life,
failed to be reflected? Above the transition into the real situation on the outline can be shown that because there has not been below the provincial level to implement a real revenue-sharing, and the "center of gravity powers down, the focus on the financial
power shift" the difficulties and problems caused by grass-roots level, not revenue-
sharing of before, just is not truly entered orbit Ershi the actual implementation of revenue-sharing "contract system", "divided into" system and so the negative effects of
institutional accumulation and amplification of the over. Do not follow the model of division of the tax base in accordance with "bargain" of the lump-sum method was
below the provincial level and is divided into four levels of institutional relations, the
local high-level "on the mentioned financial authority, powers, under pressure" in a large space, transfer payments do not true (objective to say, raise the proportion of central government financial resources are necessary; raise the proportion of the
provincial financial resources are not entirely unfounded, but should examine later whether to increase transfer payments to counties and townships; "Urban counties" areas raise the proportion of municipal financial resources are likely to bring the so-
called "City Card county", "city scraping County" factor, but it may also not be appropriate simply to make a complete denial of Yi Gai. The key issue is that the system itself can not straighten out, put the financial power has not kept pace after the
transfer payments to make The most difficult situation of appears in the county and township grass-roots). Of course, the primary difficulty with the central level, although the intensity of transfer payments are still far from enough in the efforts to improve
also related to, but if the system is not built well below the provincial level, faced with such a large country, so huge regional differences alone are powerless central government transfer payments It can not be the formation of long-term mechanism.
Tax and fee reform in rural areas since the practice has shown that grass-roots
difficulties (the difficulties of farmers and grass-roots government) issues have been
"trigger", China's economic and social transition in the "three rural issues" against the
background of the financial difficulties of counties and townships, is the transformation of social structure the system required to effectively support the transformation of institutional inadequacies and contradictions that have accumulated by the transition
not smooth at the grassroots level to focus on the Government's fiscal performance. It should be emphasized that below the provincial income tax system difficult to track the financial difficulties of counties and townships Ershi intensified with the existing
government financial "five-level" is directly related to the broad framework.
Since the revenue-sharing to be implemented, will inevitably have to draw on
international experience in a modern market economy, and based on national
conditions of China to find the implementation. From the former said that in five engage in revenue-sharing under the framework, without any international experience to follow (international experience, the general pattern is the "three level"); from the
latter said that more than 10 years of practice has shown that in our country to more than 20 types of taxes in the five layers of government and intergovernmental revenue-
sharing demands by segmentation is "no solution" in. Therefore, the crux of the
problem were as follows: five governments, five financial framework, and following the implementation of revenue-sharing in the province exist between the nature of
incompatibility. Not to mention the less developed regions, even in the developed
regions, the provincial level, how the following four sub-tax? According to the present
the basic framework is to look at from the unclear direction and can not find a "transitional state" of the path. Therefore, local grass-roots financial difficulties in
recent years, increased to a certain extent, it is precisely because the financial framework of the five tax classification and sub-fiscal falling into place, the growing
incompatibility between the clear and obvious result.
"The mountains heavy water re doubt a blind alley and vista." If we can learn from major market economy countries, mainly the framework of the implementation of three international experience, combined with China's national conditions for a gradual reform of "flat" as the guide, and gradually the substantive implementation of the tax sharing system below the provincial level, then the path ahead is likely to suddenly see the light.
Prescribe the right remedy for the root of the problem: positive implementation
of the "flat" of reform experiments, thus implementing the revenue-sharing in the
province following the creation of complementary conditions
Development of market economy has become increasingly clear to the
implementation of further reforms in fiscal and taxation system below the provincial
level in order to rationalize the urgency of the issue placed before us, it should seize the dominant factor in the tips given to us. In the grass-roots mobilization to take some
initiative and explore the potential to increase and streamline the institutions, to alleviate the financial difficulties of the grass-roots practical measures, from the
medium to long term perspective, we particularly need to grasp the "root of the problem as to" the essentials, and actively, steadily and systematically below the
provincial reconstruction institutional arrangements. The main points of which make a difference, as the Party Plenum, "National Economic and Social Development, the recommendations of the Tenth Five-Year Plan," pointed out: "straighten out the
financial management system below the provincial level, conditional place to implement the provincial management system directly to the county, "and to" consolidate the results of the reform of rural taxes and fees, and comprehensively promote
comprehensive rural reform and basically complete the rural institutions, rural compulsory education and the reform of county and township fiscal management system and other tasks. "
"Provincial tube County" and "rural county fiscal management" and other reform
experiments, the basic orientation is to seek to achieve the financial level below the provincial level to reduce (ie "flat"), its inherent logic is in turn lead to reduction in levels of government and the "flat . " Reform, city and county executive of a different
class by the Financial at the same level, does not occur substantial legal obstacles; "Rural Finance County tube" to consider changing the timing of township government sent the bodies for the county, but also with the proposed legislative amendments and
complementary and interactive . If we are in the "city level" and "township-level" two-
level fiscal reforms to "thoroughly transform", it is expected to further promote the implementation of the party of the Plenum, "reduce administrative level"
requirements, implementation of the Central , provincial and county levels, namely the township into a political organization agency of county government; prefecture-level
can we not set up no, and if the establishment of the provincial government as an
agency. This allows the province, the following revenue-sharing from the original
framework of five "no solution" to the three-tier structure of the deadlock will be
broken suddenly see the light, which will effectively promote a clear division of powers,
rationalization and build with the powers that match the classification and taxation system, significantly reducing administrative system and operating costs to better promote the county's economic development, adding them with the central, provincial
transfer payment system from top to bottom the strengthening and improvement, will effectively and decisively to ease the grass-roots financial difficulties, and create
favorable access to the less developed regions, "long-term stability" mechanism.
Accordance with the three-tier system and "a political power, a say in, a financial authority, a tax base, and a budget, a property rights, a claim held" principle, the structure is consistent with the market economy, the sub-tax classification fiscal system
is the financial predicament of the radical grass-roots way. The coming period, we
should seize the "flat" of the reform of the originating link, actively and effectively promote innovation and related systems for the tax-sharing in the province to create
conditions for the implementation of the following.
How to grasp the guidance, according to local conditions: a reasonable distinction among the gradual move toward standardization of the overall institutional arrangements
Conditions vary widely across the country, "provincial governing county" and "Rural Finance County tube" reform, are not "across the board" to a simple hard to implement, but should be emphasized that according to local conditions, and appropriate guidance. Management of the radius is too large provinces, the provincial governing county needs more supporting factors, changes in administrative division; developed areas, township businesses have been very prosperous, at present should not copy the "Rural Finance County-pipe" approach; remote, sparsely populated region,
institutional issues , To be special studies must be treated differently, and so with the mainland.
However, I believe, all of these guidance, differential treatment is not attributed to
"vertical separated into two parts, lateral sub-2" in thinking.
From the vertical, says the province under the direction of system should not be "all engage in revenue-sharing should be encouraged," but should be to create conditions
supporting reforms, institutional innovation seeks to move out of more than 10 years with virtually stranded at the non-revenue-sharing difficulties, and strive for
substantive implement the revenue-sharing manner. In addition to advancing its
elements "flat" of reforms, but also the gradual building at all levels, especially the city's tax base at the county level, so that all levels of government powers in a reasonable positioning can rely on the institutional arrangements to achieve a relatively large, stable sources of income. To the existing "shared tax", it should actively create conditions to break into the national, provincial taxes, grass-roots local taxes go up in
three directions (but in a variety of constraints, it can be over a longer period of time to
maintain value-added tax "shared tax" status). City, county-level financial resources
pillars may be considered conform to industrialization, urbanization, market-oriented
trend, through the property tax (property tax) to gradually construct. The party's third
plenum "on perfecting the socialist market economic system, the decision of a number of issues" relating to "the implementation of urban construction tax reform, when conditions are ripe for the introduction of a unified and standard real estate property
tax, the corresponding cancellation fees" requirements, and property tax has been launched in the early experiments, all this suggests scope for innovation of this system is open.
From horizontal to say, such as "developed areas and backward areas" or
"agriculture-dependent counties and non-farm-dependent counties" to divide, selective
and non-revenue-sharing revenue-sharing to walk different paths are not suitable for
cultivating a unified market requirements, eliminating the "horizontal" system of
barriers and the party's third plenum's "to create conditions for the progressive realization of a unified urban and rural tax system" approach, it is difficult to have reasonable and practical work in the operability, once want to rely on a certain these
indicators as a basis for the implementation of different systems, in fact it is easy to fall into "bargaining" trap and occurrence of more serious distortions variants.
From the horizontal and vertical coordination, the most important thing is to
actively develop and strengthen top-down "factor method" transfer payments, but also
includes the development of appropriate "horizontal transfer payments" (in our country has long been a "counterpart support," methods exist), to dynamically control
inter-regional differences, to help the less developed regions.
In short, "site-specific, classification guidance" on its principle itself, will always be established, in terms of its presentation, will always be correct, but in terms of the
financial system, this presentation should deal mainly refers to the gradual reform of the transition issues, is the tax system to promote the "strategic" and "operation" level of essentials, but from the "basic framework" and "strategic direction" level, or the
market economy should be the first to grasp the new system required by the overall objective model so that the strategy of the master to obey, serve the strategic orientation, and gradually build a rational, standardized, stable, long-lasting, internal
linking institutional arrangements, and gradually closer to a socialist market economy requires long-term goal. Reposted elsewhere in the paper for free download http://